They didn't have anything to do with Lotus before this, they don't have anything to do with them after. No difference.

They did, the Lotus car company sponsored them, hence them being known as Lotus Renault last year and Lotus this year. Lotus have since stopped giving them money but they keep the name from what I can see.

Well hopefully a US company getting in will usher in a US based F1 team and drivers.

I wouldn't be so quick to ditch a driver who outqualified Kimi Raikkonen 10-9 this season.

So...a driver that does ok Saturday but would crash every Sunday is a driver you would still keep?

I'm pointing RoGro in the question. What I'm pointing out is there's a lot more than just an just beating a teammate half the time on Saturday.

He's good...only when he's the only car on the track.

Yes, I would still keep him.

Speed wins races. He has speed. F1 is about winning races. He's still young and new to F1 and he has something you can't learn - speed. If he doesn't learn to race cleanly then ditch him, but for now they have Raikkonen, who is an excellent driver, they don't have to rely so much on the other driver to bring home the points because Raikkonen is still doing that.

They didn't have anything to do with Lotus before this, they don't have anything to do with them after. No difference.

They did, the Lotus car company sponsored them, hence them being known as Lotus Renault last year and Lotus this year. Lotus have since stopped giving them money but they keep the name from what I can see.

Yeah a deal was done that involved the potential for Proton to buy the team.

However, oddly no money exchanged hands. Big threads about the whole thing Last season before the forum changed software and everything was lost

Well hopefully a US company getting in will usher in a US based F1 team and drivers.

I wouldn't be so quick to ditch a driver who outqualified Kimi Raikkonen 10-9 this season.

So...a driver that does ok Saturday but would crash every Sunday is a driver you would still keep?

I'm pointing RoGro in the question. What I'm pointing out is there's a lot more than just an just beating a teammate half the time on Saturday.

He's good...only when he's the only car on the track.

Yes, I would still keep him.

Speed wins races. He has speed. F1 is about winning races. He's still young and new to F1 and he has something you can't learn - speed. If he doesn't learn to race cleanly then ditch him, but for now they have Raikkonen, who is an excellent driver, they don't have to rely so much on the other driver to bring home the points because Raikkonen is still doing that.

Grosjean might surprise people next year if he is still on the grid.

He never had speed on race day. He was 90% of the time slower than Kimi on race day and crashed out in allot, got a ban and never learned still. Just a wasted seat from a wrecker who should be in lower sport. The incidents and standings don't lie.

Well hopefully a US company getting in will usher in a US based F1 team and drivers.

I wouldn't be so quick to ditch a driver who outqualified Kimi Raikkonen 10-9 this season.

So...a driver that does ok Saturday but would crash every Sunday is a driver you would still keep?

I'm pointing RoGro in the question. What I'm pointing out is there's a lot more than just an just beating a teammate half the time on Saturday.

He's good...only when he's the only car on the track.

Yes, I would still keep him.

Speed wins races. He has speed. F1 is about winning races. He's still young and new to F1 and he has something you can't learn - speed. If he doesn't learn to race cleanly then ditch him, but for now they have Raikkonen, who is an excellent driver, they don't have to rely so much on the other driver to bring home the points because Raikkonen is still doing that.

Grosjean might surprise people next year if he is still on the grid.

He never had speed on race day. He was 90% of the time slower than Kimi on race day and crashed out in allot, got a ban and never learned still. Just a wasted seat from a wrecker who should be in lower sport. The incidents and standings don't lie.

Nor does 10-9 in qualifying lie. There are a lot of things that don't lie. It's a case of picking something out from the things that don't lie. Average race pace doesn't lie either, until Grosjean got his ban he was pretty much level compared to Kimi in that regard.

Saying he did not have speed on race day is a lie.

Am I saying Grosjean is better than Kimi? No. That would be a lie. I am saying that Grosjean has the potential, probably, to win races. What exactly do you think Bruno Senna or Jerome D'Ambrosio are going to do in that car? Given his potential, would it not make sense to keep Grosjean for one more year? Frankly I don't see Michael Schumacher or Alain Prost waiting to take his place.

Nor does 10-9 in qualifying lie. There are a lot of things that don't lie. It's a case of picking something out from the things that don't lie. Average race pace doesn't lie either, until Grosjean got his ban he was pretty much level compared to Kimi in that regard.

Saying he did not have speed on race day is a lie.

Am I saying Grosjean is better than Kimi? No. That would be a lie. I am saying that Grosjean has the potential, probably, to win races. What exactly do you think Bruno Senna or Jerome D'Ambrosio are going to do in that car? Given his potential, would it not make sense to keep Grosjean for one more year? Frankly I don't see Michael Schumacher or Alain Prost waiting to take his place.

No saying he does have speed on race day is a lie, as apart from the odd race he was always slower than Kimi on race day and his race craft is awful.

I'm not surprised that Lotus are getting big sponsors in. Ignoring the financial accounts type stuff (I don't know enough about that to comment), they are a very likeable team (hey, Crashgate was a while back and the main culprits - Teflonso aside - have gone), with relatively good support, excellent people at the team, popular drivers and the potential to go far (and even win the WDC and WCC).

Nor does 10-9 in qualifying lie. There are a lot of things that don't lie. It's a case of picking something out from the things that don't lie. Average race pace doesn't lie either, until Grosjean got his ban he was pretty much level compared to Kimi in that regard.

Saying he did not have speed on race day is a lie.

Am I saying Grosjean is better than Kimi? No. That would be a lie. I am saying that Grosjean has the potential, probably, to win races. What exactly do you think Bruno Senna or Jerome D'Ambrosio are going to do in that car? Given his potential, would it not make sense to keep Grosjean for one more year? Frankly I don't see Michael Schumacher or Alain Prost waiting to take his place.

No saying he does have speed on race day is a lie, as apart from the odd race he was always slower than Kimi on race day and his race craft is awful.

Nor does 10-9 in qualifying lie. There are a lot of things that don't lie. It's a case of picking something out from the things that don't lie. Average race pace doesn't lie either, until Grosjean got his ban he was pretty much level compared to Kimi in that regard.

Saying he did not have speed on race day is a lie.

Am I saying Grosjean is better than Kimi? No. That would be a lie. I am saying that Grosjean has the potential, probably, to win races. What exactly do you think Bruno Senna or Jerome D'Ambrosio are going to do in that car? Given his potential, would it not make sense to keep Grosjean for one more year? Frankly I don't see Michael Schumacher or Alain Prost waiting to take his place.

No saying he does have speed on race day is a lie, as apart from the odd race he was always slower than Kimi on race day and his race craft is awful.

As said the incidents and standings don't lie.

So who would you replace the guy who outqualified Kimi 10-9 with? Alain Prost? Michael Schumacher?

Nor does 10-9 in qualifying lie. There are a lot of things that don't lie. It's a case of picking something out from the things that don't lie. Average race pace doesn't lie either, until Grosjean got his ban he was pretty much level compared to Kimi in that regard.

Saying he did not have speed on race day is a lie.

Am I saying Grosjean is better than Kimi? No. That would be a lie. I am saying that Grosjean has the potential, probably, to win races. What exactly do you think Bruno Senna or Jerome D'Ambrosio are going to do in that car? Given his potential, would it not make sense to keep Grosjean for one more year? Frankly I don't see Michael Schumacher or Alain Prost waiting to take his place.

No saying he does have speed on race day is a lie, as apart from the odd race he was always slower than Kimi on race day and his race craft is awful.

I'm supporting Grosjean on this forums, but this time I must disagree. It should rather be average points per start. Maybe you should just excuse mechanical failures only. Otherwise it's misleading. With all 19 start it is: 96 / 19 = 5,05263158.

_________________Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.Mark Twain

Well hopefully a US company getting in will usher in a US based F1 team and drivers.

I wouldn't be so quick to ditch a driver who outqualified Kimi Raikkonen 10-9 this season.

So...a driver that does ok Saturday but would crash every Sunday is a driver you would still keep?

I'm pointing RoGro in the question. What I'm pointing out is there's a lot more than just an just beating a teammate half the time on Saturday.

He's good...only when he's the only car on the track.

Yes, I would still keep him.

Speed wins races. He has speed. F1 is about winning races. He's still young and new to F1 and he has something you can't learn - speed. If he doesn't learn to race cleanly then ditch him, but for now they have Raikkonen, who is an excellent driver, they don't have to rely so much on the other driver to bring home the points because Raikkonen is still doing that.

Grosjean might surprise people next year if he is still on the grid.

Figured. You're a RoGro fan thus being biased.

RoGro may have cost third spot in the constructors. Plus the millions lost in destroying things.

I would let RoGro come back as long as everyone knows Kimi is driver #1.

Well hopefully a US company getting in will usher in a US based F1 team and drivers.

I wouldn't be so quick to ditch a driver who outqualified Kimi Raikkonen 10-9 this season.

So...a driver that does ok Saturday but would crash every Sunday is a driver you would still keep?

I'm pointing RoGro in the question. What I'm pointing out is there's a lot more than just an just beating a teammate half the time on Saturday.

He's good...only when he's the only car on the track.

Yes, I would still keep him.

Speed wins races. He has speed. F1 is about winning races. He's still young and new to F1 and he has something you can't learn - speed. If he doesn't learn to race cleanly then ditch him, but for now they have Raikkonen, who is an excellent driver, they don't have to rely so much on the other driver to bring home the points because Raikkonen is still doing that.

Grosjean might surprise people next year if he is still on the grid.

Figured. You're a RoGro fan thus being biased.

RoGro may have cost third spot in the constructors. Plus the millions lost in destroying things.

I would let RoGro come back as long as everyone knows Kimi is driver #1.

Not really. I support Michael Schumacher, and in his second retirement I will probably support Massa and Hamilton, same as 2007, 2008 and 2009.

How would making Kimi no.1 help? He already is no.1 in every way that matters. I don't see the rush, to replace Grosjean with someone like Bruno Senna who also had several contacts against other cars in 2012, and is relatively slow.

Nor does 10-9 in qualifying lie. There are a lot of things that don't lie. It's a case of picking something out from the things that don't lie. Average race pace doesn't lie either, until Grosjean got his ban he was pretty much level compared to Kimi in that regard.

Saying he did not have speed on race day is a lie.

Am I saying Grosjean is better than Kimi? No. That would be a lie. I am saying that Grosjean has the potential, probably, to win races. What exactly do you think Bruno Senna or Jerome D'Ambrosio are going to do in that car? Given his potential, would it not make sense to keep Grosjean for one more year? Frankly I don't see Michael Schumacher or Alain Prost waiting to take his place.

No saying he does have speed on race day is a lie, as apart from the odd race he was always slower than Kimi on race day and his race craft is awful.

Nor does 10-9 in qualifying lie. There are a lot of things that don't lie. It's a case of picking something out from the things that don't lie. Average race pace doesn't lie either, until Grosjean got his ban he was pretty much level compared to Kimi in that regard.

Saying he did not have speed on race day is a lie.

Am I saying Grosjean is better than Kimi? No. That would be a lie. I am saying that Grosjean has the potential, probably, to win races. What exactly do you think Bruno Senna or Jerome D'Ambrosio are going to do in that car? Given his potential, would it not make sense to keep Grosjean for one more year? Frankly I don't see Michael Schumacher or Alain Prost waiting to take his place.

No saying he does have speed on race day is a lie, as apart from the odd race he was always slower than Kimi on race day and his race craft is awful.

points per finish one can finish one race in season, got first place and have 25 points per finish if this kind of calculation is used

per race... only 'per race' counted.

_________________We are worse than animals, we hunger for the killWe put our faith in maniacs the triumph of the willWe kill for money, wealth and lust, for this we should be damnedWe are disease upon the world, brotherhood of man

I would actually more point to Kimi's better speed in the wet, as a troubling factor for me.

Schumacher and Vettel were both crash kids (nowhere near as bad as RoGro), but they were good in the wet right away (Schumacher in Adelaide '91, Spain '92, Vettel in Fuji '07, Monza '08). That is the sign of a great driver and I haven't seen it from RoGro.

Speed in dry, RoGro is quick, no doubt about it. Crashing is terrible, but I think he can improve it.

Coca colaMicrosoftUnileverIf they do have Honeywell, and there are many rumours, they've done very well this year.

I don't think the size of these companies matters. What is important is how much the company pays Lotus. Microsoft is one of the biggest companies involved in F1, but I've never heard that the deal with Lotus is lucrative.

Personally, I think both the size of the company and what they're paying is important. Microsoft may (or may not) be paying less, but they're one of the biggest companies on the planet, so unless the partnership isn't proving beneficial to them, there's no reason they wouldn't be a long-term partner. Whereas a smaller company paying more money might be better in the short-term, but perhaps they wouldn't provide the long-term stability of a Microsoft. Plus seeing the likes of Microsoft and Coca-Cola (albeit under the Burn moniker) backing a team, it must make them more attractive to other potential sponsors.

Quite right. And these days sponsors really are becoming more like partners. What you can offer a team in terms of resources, technical tieups etc. can be as important as the money. And as you say, association is a powerful thing. Just look at the explosion in tech and financial sponsorship that came about when firms no longer had to put their name next to a giant Marlboro/West/B&H/Lucky Strike logo. McLaren are a great example of making this work, their profile of partners is incredible. Ron credits a selective approach to taking sponsorship money for quality they have on the books. If you have a car covered in stickers for The Sun, payday loan companies, obscure satellite TV stations and so on, blue chips won't be as interested as if it they were sharing with similarly 'high end' firms.

_________________Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?-Epicurus

I wouldn't be so quick to ditch a driver who outqualified Kimi Raikkonen 10-9 this season.

So...a driver that does ok Saturday but would crash every Sunday is a driver you would still keep?

I'm pointing RoGro in the question. What I'm pointing out is there's a lot more than just an just beating a teammate half the time on Saturday.

He's good...only when he's the only car on the track.

Yes, I would still keep him.

Speed wins races. He has speed. F1 is about winning races. He's still young and new to F1 and he has something you can't learn - speed. If he doesn't learn to race cleanly then ditch him, but for now they have Raikkonen, who is an excellent driver, they don't have to rely so much on the other driver to bring home the points because Raikkonen is still doing that.

Grosjean might surprise people next year if he is still on the grid.

Figured. You're a RoGro fan thus being biased.

RoGro may have cost third spot in the constructors. Plus the millions lost in destroying things.

I would let RoGro come back as long as everyone knows Kimi is driver #1.

Not really. I support Michael Schumacher, and in his second retirement I will probably support Massa and Hamilton, same as 2007, 2008 and 2009.

How would making Kimi no.1 help? He already is no.1 in every way that matters. I don't see the rush, to replace Grosjean with someone like Bruno Senna who also had several contacts against other cars in 2012, and is relatively slow.

I remember when the perception of Mika Hakkinen was exactly as Grosjean's is now. He was even banned for the same reasons at one point. Then he suddenly became one of the most consistent and best drivers of his era.

Of course you have to say 'enough is enough' at some point. But to drop a talent like Grosjean would be a shame, and a sad sign of modern F1's lack of patience with those who don't have much money. If it were my team and my money I'd take Grosjean well before Kobayashi, di Resta or Perez.

_________________Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?-Epicurus

I remember when the perception of Mika Hakkinen was exactly as Grosjean's is now. He was even banned for the same reasons at one point. Then he suddenly became one of the most consistent and best drivers of his era.

Of course you have to say 'enough is enough' at some point. But to drop a talent like Grosjean would be a shame, and a sad sign of modern F1's lack of patience with those who don't have much money. If it were my team and my money I'd take Grosjean well before Kobayashi, di Resta or Perez.

Exactly, I like Kamui Kobayashi but to kick out a driver after one season when he has showed good pace but crashed too much simply doesn't sit well with me.

I could understand Lotus replacing Grosjean if it really liked another candidate, but at this point, despite his problems, he has shown good speed and doesn't seem like a hopeless cause yet who can't learn from his mistakes and put it all together at some point in the near future.

I'm going to be curious to see if D'Ambrosio is signed on as the test driver, when I read the report about a week back listing RoGro, D'Ambrosio and Heikki as the candidates for the seat, I wondered if they might bring back Grosjean on a short leash with D'Ambrosio as a ready replacement if they feel that strongly about him. With this season behind him, he'd have a very short learning curve if Lotus needed to make a mid-season replacement.

The other consideration is given the experienced drivers who evidently won't start next year on the grid, I expect there will be more than a few drivers sitting on pretty warm seats.

I'm anxious to see the 2013 livery to see how prominent Honeywell appears, at a reported $30-mil I'm guessing very prominent, as my dad worked for the company in the aerospace division for about 20 years when I was growing up. Seems funny because I always associate it as a rather dull company (despite being a part of some very interesting projects) that almost never advertised for any of the fields it was involved in. So if its right there on Kimi's rear wing or side pod, it'll will be a real kick to see for me.

I remember when the perception of Mika Hakkinen was exactly as Grosjean's is now. He was even banned for the same reasons at one point. Then he suddenly became one of the most consistent and best drivers of his era.

Of course you have to say 'enough is enough' at some point. But to drop a talent like Grosjean would be a shame, and a sad sign of modern F1's lack of patience with those who don't have much money. If it were my team and my money I'd take Grosjean well before Kobayashi, di Resta or Perez.

Spot on, I'm now thinking one more season to see how he develops before making that decision. Was watching Mika's Legends of F1 again the other day and it reminded me that if that double WDC was starting now, he possibly wouldn't cut it.

_________________"We can not drive slower, just to make the races more exciting." Alain Prost